661

Hall for disposing of the sewage of London, it appears to meto be open to the following objections :-

1. To construct a double system of drains-one for the wastehousehold water, and the other for water-closets-would entailextra expenses and extra risks.

2. To turn waste household water into the Thames insteadof into the general sewers, is open to the objection-first, ofemptying into the Thames waters containing animal andvegetable refuse; secondly, because such waters contain manure,which might be turned to account; thirdly, because the possi-bility of washing or flushing the sewers would be thus putaside.

3. To collect, all the solid sewage of London at one or moreplaces in or near London, you must first ensure its then meet-ing with a constant sale, otherwise you merely collect enor-mous masses of corruption. But it is evident that a constantsale could not be guaranteed; and, indeed, it might be madea question whether at any time the manure would pay the ex-pense of carting by railway cars, as proposed.

It appears to me that a plan analogous to that of Mr.M’Clean is the best-viz., to carry the sewage, by tunnels ordrains, down into Essex and Kent, and, if necessary, on to theGerman Ocean. By this plan you could have, at stated in-tervals, reservoirs, where the sewage could be deodorized andsold as demanded, but when not sold passed on. By this planyou enhance the value of land to a great extent along the entireline of the main drains. In the neighbourhood of Edinburgh,land so favoured lets at X30 an acre per annum, land in Kentand Essex being now let at 40s. and 50s. an acre. Such beingthe case, little, if any, of the sewage would be ultimately per-mitted to reach the German Ocean.Having given much attention to this subject, I trust you will

find space for these few observations.I am, Sir, yours, &c.,

London, Dec. 1856. GEO. WYLD, M.D.GEO. WYLD, M.D.

THE TRUE NATURE OF PHTHISIS.[LETTER FROM DR. ANDREW CLARK.]

To the Editor of THE LANCET.SIR,-It appears to me, from a perusal of last week’s LANCET,

that Dr. Smith has written a disingenious letter; and that hehas stirred up a dust of abstruse words and ideas to cover hisretreat from an untenable position.

I think that a plain subject may be discussed in a plain waywithout expressed reference to metaphysical abstractions orlogical forms; and that if we will accept common terms in theircurrent signification, there need be no obscurity in the state-ment of the question at issue, and no difficulty in forming ajudgment of its truth or error.

I cannot follow Dr. Smith into his misstatements, and theyare sufficiently obvious to render it unnecessary. Neither canI hope to emulate the subtleties of a logic which converts adenial of inspiratory action in the air-cells into a denial ofrespiratory action in the lungs. I must restrict my reply to afinal restatement of the question under debate in its originaland uncomplicated form. And this is necessary because Dr.Smith appears to confound the movements of respiration withthe blood changes to which these motions are subservient, andbecause the real point to be discussed is becoming quicklyovershadowed by a cloud of words.By inspiration or inspiratory action is meant the drawing in

of air into the lungs.By expiration or expiratory action is meant the throwing out

of air from the lungs.Neither inspiration nor expiration constitutes respiration:

they are movements inseparably allied with, and subservientto it.By respiration is meant the interchange of certain elements

between the atmosphere and the blood.Now, if there is any settled relation between words and

ideas, it follows from these received explanations of terms thatwhen a man speaks of the inspiratory action of the air-cells, hemust mean the action which they exert in drawing in the air ;if he avers that he does not mean this, then his words are norepresentations of his thoughts, and we can never hope to knowwhat he means by what he says.One or other position must be assigned to Dr. Smith in the

present discussion. Dr. Smith considers that phthisis is " adiminished inspiratory action of the air-cells."

It is universally admitted that the air-cells do not draw airinto the lungs; in other words, that they do not perform theinapiratory act.

. It will be seen, however, that Dr. Smith does ascribe an in-spiratory action to the air-cells, and that he makes a diminu-tion of that action the peculiarity of his view of phthisis.

I am constrained by all these facts, therefore, to repeat thatDr. Smith, in framing such conclusions from his observations,has committed a physiological error, and developed from it a.theory, which is, for that reason, fundamentally untenable.

In conclusion, I beg to assure Dr. Smith, that, in the compo-sition of my former letter, I was actuated by no such feelingsas he imputes to me; that I am too deeply conscious of my owndeficiencies and needs for indulgence to fall consciously intosuch presumption; and that I am heartily sorry that anythingI have written, even in haste, is susceptible of the constructionput upon it.

I have the honour to be, Sir, your most obedient servant,Montague-place, Russell-square, Dec. 1856. ANDREW CLARK.ANDREW CLARK.

THE NON-RESIDENT FELLOWS OF THE COL-LEGE OF SURGEONS OF EDINBURGH.

To the Editor of THE LANCET.

SIR,-I beg to make a few remarks on the letter of " AFellow of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh," con-tained in THE LANCET of the 29th ult.Your correspondent begins by deprecating the tone of your

article on the subject of the non-resident fellowship. Anyone, however, but a fellow of the College, would admit thatit is scarcely possible to avoid a tone of raillery at the exceed-ing simplicity of supposing that such a measure would beacceptable to the profession. Even your correspondent wouldlaugh if the Government, as a means of raising the revenue,were to announce their readiness, for the moderate sum of =625,.to bestow the title of M.P., with all the privileges of the realsenator, except that of attending the House of Commons, orinterfering, in any way, with the affairs of the nation.The project of the College reminds me of a little trick that

I have sometimes attempted to play off upon my children whenthey were very young, by turning an empty egg-shell, withthe broken end into the cup, and presenting it to them. Buttheir answer was always very much the same as that of theprofession to the College - ’’ Oh, papa ! I know it’s only ahumbug !"

It is evident that the framers of the measure have been mis-led by the fact that a desire was expressed by many to pos-sess the fellowship of a college at a price considerably reduced,on the ground that they were unable, from distance, to reapits full advantages." But the error consisted in the suppositionthat this desire would be gratified by the possession of a meremake-believe title. As well might you expect that a miser,who hoards up wealth useless to himself, would be satisfiedwith counterfeit bank-notes.Your correspondent states that no privilege enjoyed by the

. residents is withheld from the non-residents, except the rightto vote at their meetings, Let us see how far this is the case., The circular of the College expressly says that non-resident

fellows shall be denied, not only the privilege of voting, butalso that of attending the meetings. The resident fellows are

. eligible for election as office-bearers, with the consequent status

. in the profession and with the public; it is absurd to supposethat this eligibility can be extended to those who are debarredfrom taking any part in the proceedings of the College. The

. resident fellows are entitled to the use of the library of theEdinburgh University. This privilege they enjoy by an agree-

. ment made some years ago, when the College made over theirlibrary, on condition that their fellows should have the uee of

: that of the University. It is, however, very questionable; whether, by the spirit of this agreement, the College can

extend thia privilege to any whom they may constitute merelynominal fellows, more especially if residing out of Edinburgh.

It would be of advantage if the College would say, explicitly,L what privileges the non-resident fellows will enjoy. I do notknow of one, except that of putting F. instead of L. after theiri names.

; Your correspondent says, for himself and others, that they) voted for the late measure without any idea of its finality, andr as a step in the right direction. This will give satisfaction,

as it excites a hope that more liberal measures may be expected;but it is probable that many will wait to know what those

measures are before they accept the offer of the College. Inthe meantime, it may be of some advantage to canvass in a

r wider arena than within the College walls what these measuresought to be. Permit me, therefore, to say a few words on thissubject.

661

662

I suppose the chief objection to conferring the right to voteon the non-resident fellows is, that active and intriguingresident members might occasionally endeavour, by canvassing,to bring forward non-residents to enable them to carry theirpoint in disputed matters. It must be admitted that there isconsiderable force in this objection, and it appears reasonablethat the decision of disputed points should be left to thosewho, by habitual attendance, are thoroughly acquainted withthe subject. This objection, however, might easily be avoidedsimply by subjecting the non-resident fellows to the same finesfor non-attendance as are now enforced against those residentin Edinburgh; but giving them the privilege of being, at theirown request, exempted from the fines, such exemption to

carry with it the exclusion from the privilege of voting, and anotice of three months being required of their wish to be re-stored to the roll.

I cannot suppose that anyone will attempt to justify theexclusion of non-residents from attendance at the meetings andfrom joining in the deliberations, whether allowed to vote ornot. Indeed, so groundless is such an exclusion, that its beingcontained in the late Act of the College appears almost like anintended insult.

Non-resident fellows might also be made eligible for electionas office-bearers, by the creation of a few additional councillorsand office-bearers, to be selected from the non-residents. Thebenefit of this, as providing a worthy object of ambition to theprovincialist, is too obvious to require comment.

It would be a great boon if the use of the University Librarycould be secured to the non-resident fellows, as it would tendto supply a want that has been long and severely felt bycountry practitioners.

It is stated by your correspondent that some in Edinburghobject to the late Act, as being calculated to deluge the Collegewith provincial mediocrities. Whether a deluge of provincialmay be more offensive than one of metropolitan mediocrities,may be disputed. But, as many would desire the fellowshipchiefly as an honour, it would be very desirable that somemeans should be provided by which the fellowship, whetherresident or non-resident, should be a test of something higherthan merely the ability to pay a specified sum.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,Dollar, N. B., Dec. 1856. JOHN M. STRACHAN, M.D.JOHN M. STRACHAN, M.D

DENTISTRY PRESENT AND FUTURE.To the Editor of THE LANCET.

SIR,—It would appear that dentists of all denominations inLondon consider some course of education necessary to elevatedentistry from its present anomalous position. I assume thisto be a fact for the following reasons-viz., that I have recentlyreceived circulars from two societies, professedly having thisobject in view.The first Society that honoured me with a circular I declined

being connected with, from the fear that qualified and unqua-lified gentlemen might not agree in council, and thereby frus-trate the common object in view.The second circular I received was from the Odontological

Society. This Society, in their circular, gave the names oftheir president and council, also a copy of their bye-laws, regu-lations, &c. On perusal of this list of names, I felt if I wereanxious for intercourse with the members of my profession,and the advancement of dentistry, I must of necessity acceptthe honour intended me, and join the Society. Havingaccepted the honour, I beg to say there is much that I admireand agree with in the rules of this Society; but as they are atpresent constructed, I must consider them those of a scientificand not those of a surgical society, the last of which I considerthey ought to be. The rule I consider wanting is the follow-ing :-That after a certain lapse of time (say two years) nogentlemen be considered eligible for membership except thosewho have qualified themselves as surgeons. I give the twoyears in order that vested interests may not be interfered with.

I suggest this rule through your paper, not with the view ofcoercing the learned council, but in order that my opinion(which I honestly believe to be correct) may obtain that weightand importance which publicity in your valuable journal canalone give it. If what I suggest as a rule be established assuch, I have not the least doubt but that in time this Societywill be recognised by the Colleges of Surgery and hospitalsthroughout the kingdom.

I remain, Sir, your very obedient servant,SAMUEL MACLEAN, F.It. C. S.I.

Brook-street, Bond-street, Dec. 1856.662

SAMUEL MACLEAN, F.R.C.S.I.

THE ROYAL MEDICAL BENEVOLENTCOLLEGE.

INCREASED CHARGE FOR EXHIBITIONERS.

MATT. FRENCH WAGSTAFFE,(for Committee.)

To the Editor of THE LANCET.SIR, -As it has been ascertained that the next meeting of

the Council of the Royal Medical Benevolent College will notbe held until Wednesday the 7th of January next, may I re-quest you will be kind enough to give space for this letter inyour journal, as it will much assist the cause. The memorialrequesting the Council to convene an extraordinary meetingwill be presented on that day. A deputation will attend forthat purpose, and also to hold a conference with the Council asto the best course to be pursued in order to bring the matterat issue (if possible) to an amicable termination. It is hopedthat the deputation will succeed in obtaining such a statementof accounts and of the calculations on which the supposednecessity for the increased charge is based, as will enable allparties to form an impartial judgment upon the question. Thefollowing signatures, to which considerable additions will bemade, have already been appended to the memorial.

Walcot-place West, Kennington, MATT. FRENCH WAGSTAFFE,December 10th, 1856. (for Committee.)

’ Here follow the signatures of 117 governors of the Insti.tution.

SCOTLAND.

(FROM OUR EDINBURGH CORRESPONDENT.)THE result of the election for the Council of the Royal Col-

lege of Physicians is alike satisfactory to the profession gene-rally as it is creditable to the good taste and judgment dis-played by the fellows in their choice. Dr. Macalagan ispresident, Dr. J. Begbie vice-president, and the other membersof the Council are Drs. Robert Christison, J. B. Malcolm, C.Bell, Seller, and Peddie. By this it will be seen that a com-plete revolution has been effected. While some fellows of the

College wish to combine the College of Physicians with theCollege of Surgeons, others are desirous that, if any combina-tion be necessary, it should be joined with their Alma Mater.In this election the advocates of the latter have triumphed.Thus two successes have been gained by the majority of fellows.The first ordinary meeting of the Royal Society took place

on Monday evening, the 1st of December. An eloquentopening address was delivered by Bishop Terrot, who madea pathetic allusion to the members who had died during thepast year, mentioning especially the names of Ballingall andMadden. The rev. gentleman passed a graceful eulogium upontheir scientific acquirements and private worth. A communi-cation was read before the Society by Joseph Lister, Esq., on" The Minute Structure of the Involuntary Muscular Tissue."The paper displayed considerable research, and was listened towith marked attention. At its conclusion Dr. Alison compli-mented Mr. Lister upon the acquisition his observations wouldprove to science. Professor Bennett also congratulated himupon the results he had arrived at-his proofs of the contrac-tility of the minute vessels. The professor said that last sum-mer he had made careful experiments upon a frog. Carefullysecuring and chloroforming it, he had applied hot water as astimulus. The vessels thereupon contracted from 7 to 5, and13 to 8, according to their measurements; those which did notwere filled with blood corpuscles. Mr. Paget had said that,upon applying stimuli to a frog’s foot, the vessels were para-lysed : this was now fully proved to be erroneous. Mr. WhartonJones had stated that, instead of being contractile, they wereinert, tubes; but Mr. Lister’s paper and careful experimentsenabled them to arrive at different results. It appears thatProfessor Bennett and Mr. Lister differ but slightly. Mr.Lister says the minute vessels are arteries, and the professorbelieves them to be capillaries. This will, however, soon bedetermined, and then we may hope for an elucidation of allthe mysteries involved in the word "inflammation."At the Royal College of Surgeons, on Friday evening, the

president and fellows held their first conversazione for thisseason. Dr. Andrew Wood, the president, having made somesuitable introductory observations, announced that during thepresent season lectures would be delivered by Professors Bal-four, G. Wilson, Allen Thomson, of Glasgow, Dr. Sanders, &c.Mr. Lister then delivered a lecture on "The Early Stages ofInflammation," as evident, under the microscope, in the footof a frog. The lecture was a more elaborate account of the